Healthcare Costs Related to Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Among Veterans With Cirrhosis in the United States.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: It is important to quantify medical costs associated with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the incidence of which is rapidly increasing in the United States, for development of rational healthcare policies related to liver cancer surveillance and treatment of chronic liver disease. We aimed to comprehensively quantify healthcare costs for HCC among patients with cirrhosis in an integrated health system and develop a model for predicting costs that is based on clinically relevant variables. METHODS: Three years subsequent to liver cancer diagnosis, costs accrued by patients included in the Veteran's Outcome and Cost Associated with Liver disease cohort were compiled by using the Department of Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse. The cohort includes all patients with HCC diagnosed in 2008-2010 within the VA with 100% chart confirmation as well as chart abstraction of tumor and clinical characteristics. Cancer cases were matched 1:4 with non-cancer cirrhosis controls on the basis of severity of liver disease, age, and comorbidities to estimate background cirrhosis-related costs. Univariable and multivariable generalized linear models were developed and used to predict cancer-related overall cost. RESULTS: Our analysis included 3188 cases of HCC and 12,722 controls. The mean 3-year total cost of care in HCC patients was $154,688 (standard error, $150,953-$158,422) compared with $69,010 (standard error, $67,344-$70,675) in matched cirrhotic controls, yielding an incremental cost of $85,679; 64.9% of this value reflected increased inpatient costs. In univariable analyses, receipt of transplantation, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage, liver disease etiology, hospital academic affiliation, use of multidisciplinary tumor board, and identification through surveillance were associated with cancer-related costs. Multivariable generalized linear models incorporating transplantation status, BCLC stage, and multidisciplinary tumor board presentation accurately predicted liver cancer-related costs (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit; P value ≅ 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: In a model developed to comprehensively quantify healthcare costs for HCC among patients with cirrhosis in an integrated health system, we associated receipt of liver transplantation, BCLC stage, and multidisciplinary tumor board with higher costs. Models that predict total costs on the basis of receipt of liver transplantation were constructed and can be used to model cost-effectiveness of therapies focused on HCC prevention.

Cost-effectiveness of strategies for testing current hepatitis C virus infection.

UNLABELLED: Six strategies for identifying hepatitis C virus (HCV) viremia, involving testing for HCV antibody (HCVAb) followed by a nucleic acid test (NAT) for HCV RNA when the antibody test is positive, are compared. Decision analysis was used to determine mean relative cost per person tested and outcomes of HCV viremia detection. Parameters included proportions of test population with HCVAb and viremia plus specificity, sensitivity, and cost of individual tests. For testing a population with an HCVAb seroprevalence of 3.25%, all strategies when adopting quantitative NAT vary little in cost (range, $29.50-$30.70) and are highly viremia specific (≥0.9997). Four of the strategies using venipuncture blood for HCVAb testing (whether laboratory conducted or employing a rapid, point-of-care assay) and for NAT (whether done by reflex or using separately drawn blood) achieve the highest viremia sensitivities (range, 0.9950-0.9954). Point-of-care HCVAb testing in fingerstick blood followed by NAT in venipuncture blood yields relatively lower viremia sensitivity (0.9301). The strategy that requires returning for NAT is even less viremia sensitive (<0.9000) because of follow-up loss. Strategies adopting qualitative rather than quantitative NAT are slightly cheaper (range, $28.90-$29.99), similarly viremia specific (≥0.9997), but less viremia sensitive (≤0.9456). Viremia sensitivity and specificity remain the same regardless of the proportion of HCVAb-seropositive persons in the cohort being tested. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies involving HCVAb testing in venipuncture blood, whether laboratory conducted or using a point-of-care assay, when followed by quantitative NAT done reflexively or in separately drawn blood, are comparably economical and suitably viremia sensitive. Less cost-effective is point-of-care HCVAb testing in fingerstick blood followed by NAT in venipuncture blood. Least cost-effective is the strategy requiring the tested person to return for NAT.

Evaluation of Solar-Powered Battery Systems for Individuals Using Electricity-Dependent Medical Devices in Puerto Rico Following Hurricane Maria.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if solar-powered battery systems could be successfully used for electricity-dependent medical devices by families during a power outage. METHODS: We assessed the use of and satisfaction with solar-powered battery systems distributed to 15 families following Hurricane Maria in rural Puerto Rico. Interviews were conducted in July 2018, 3 mo following distribution of the systems. RESULTS: The solar-powered battery systems powered refrigeration for medications and prescribed diets, asthma therapy, inflatable mattresses to prevent bedsores, and continuous positive airway pressure machines for sleep apnea. Despite some system problems, such as inadequate power, defective cables, and blown fuses, families successfully dealt with these issues with some outside help. Almost all families were pleased with the systems and a majority would recommend solar-powered battery systems to a neighbor. CONCLUSIONS: Families accepted and successfully used solar-powered battery systems to power medical devices. Solar-powered battery systems should be considered as alternatives to generators for power outages after hurricanes and other disasters. Additional research and analysis are needed to inform policy on increasing access to such systems.

Equivalence of two healthcare costing methods: bottom-up and top-down.

This paper compares two quite different approaches to estimating costs: a 'bottom-up' approach, represented by the US Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) Decision Support System that uses local costs of specific inputs; and a 'top-down' approach, represented by the costing system created by the VA Health Economics Resource Center, which assigns the VA national healthcare budget to specific products using various weighting systems. Total annual costs per patient plus the cost for specific services (e.g. clinic visit, radiograph, laboratory, inpatient admission) were compared using scatterplots, correlations, mean difference, and standard deviation of individual differences. Analysis are based upon 2001 costs for 14 915 patients at 72 facilities. Correlations ranged from 0.24 for the cost of outpatient encounters to 0.77 for the cost of inpatient admissions, and 0.85 for total annual cost. The mean difference between costing methods was $707 ($4168 versus $3461) for total annual cost. The standard deviation of the individual differences was $5934. Overall, the agreement between the two costing systems varied by the specific cost being measured and increased with aggregation. Administrators and researchers conducting cost analyses need to carefully consider the purpose, methods, characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses when selecting a method for assessing cost.

Assisted living pilot program: background, methods, and facility characteristics.

Objectives. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) funded assisted living (AL), adult family home (AFH), and residential care for the first time in the Assisted Living Pilot Program (ALPP). This article describes the background and methods of the ALPP evaluation and the characteristics and experiences of the facilities. Method. Facility data were collected from the contracting/inspection process and a survey of ALPP facilities and those contacted but not participating in ALPP. Results. Data on 131 participating facilities are presented: 41 AFHs, 47 assisted living facilities (ALFs), and 43 residential care facilities (RCFs). The average facility had 33 beds (about one quarter Medicaid beds), for-profit ownership, and private rooms for ALPP residents, and about half had private baths. About two thirds of ALPP AFH providers spoke a primary language other than English. Discussion. Findings indicate that a wide range of community facilities were willing to provide care to residents with heterogeneous needs on VA funding.

Assisted living pilot program: utilization and cost findings.

Objective. The Department of Veterans Affairs funded assisted living, adult family home, and adult residential care for the first time in the Assisted Living Pilot Program (ALPP). This article compares the use and cost for individuals that entered ALPP and a comparison group. Method. This was a nonrandomized study. The comparison group consisted of VA patients who were eligible but did not enter an ALPP facility. The ALPP (n = 393) and comparison (n = 259) groups were followed for 12 months to assess ALPP facility, case management, and health care costs. Results. ALPP facility and ALPP case management costs were respectively $5,560 and $2,830 per individual. Total health care costs, including ALPP costs, were $11,533 higher for the ALPP group compared to the comparison group after adjusting for baseline differences. Discussion. Although ALPP successfully helped individuals transition to longer term care in these facilities, it was more costly than the comparison group.

Assisted living pilot program: health outcomes.

Objectives. Assisted living programs demonstrate variation in structure and services. The Department of Veterans Affairs funded this care for the first time in the Assisted Living Pilot Program (ALPP). This article presents resident health outcomes and the relationship between facility characteristics and outcomes. Method. This article presents results on 393 ALPP residents followed for 12 months after admission to 95 facilities. Results. A total of 19.8% residents died, and the average activities of daily living impairment did not change significantly. Half of the residents remained in an ALPP facility, with the average resident spending 315 days in the community during the 12-month follow-up period. This article found a limited number of characteristics of structure and staffing to be significantly associated with outcomes. Discussion. If differences among facility characteristics are not clearly related to differences in outcomes, then choices among type of setting can be based on the match of needs to available services, location, or preferences.

The impact of contract primary care on health care expenditures and quality of care.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) established community-based outpatient clinics to improve veterans' access to primary care. This article compares VA use and expenditures among primary care users at 76 VA-staffed community clinics (n = 17,060) and 32 non-VA contract community clinics receiving capitation (n = 6,842) using VA administrative databases. It estimates utilization using negative binomial models and expenditures using generalized linear one-part or two-part models. Contract community clinic patients are less likely to use all types of outpatient services than VA-staffed community clinic patients but had similar quality of care. For patients seeking care, contract community clinic patients had similar specialty care expenditures but lower primary care, outpatient, and overall expenditures. Results suggest that capitated contract clinics did not shift costs to specialty care and appeared to be an economically efficient mechanism for improving veterans' access to primary care while meeting VA quality of care standards.

The association between health insurance coverage and diabetes care; data from the 2000 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the association between type of health insurance coverage and the quality of care provided to individuals with diabetes in the United States. DATA SOURCE: The 2000 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. STUDY DESIGN: Our study cohort included individuals who reported a diagnosis of diabetes (n=11,647). We performed bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses by age greater or less than 65 years to examine the association of health insurance coverage with diabetes-specific quality of care measures, controlling for the effects of race/ethnicity, annual income, gender, education, and insulin use. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Most individuals with diabetes are covered by private insurance (39 percent) or Medicare (44 percent). Among persons under the age of 65 years, 11 percent were uninsured. The uninsured were more likely to be African American or Hispanic and report low incomes. The uninsured were less likely to report annual dilated eye exams, foot examinations, or hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) tests and less likely to perform daily blood glucose monitoring than those with private health insurance. We found few differences in quality indicators between Medicare, Medicaid, or the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) as compared with private insurance coverage. Persons who received care through the VA were more likely to report taking a diabetes education class and HbA1c testing than those covered by private insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Uninsured adults with diabetes are predominantly minority and low income and receive fewer preventive services than individuals with health insurance. Among the insured, different types of health insurance coverage appear to provide similar levels of care, except for higher rates of diabetes education and HbA1c testing at the VA.

Data resources in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of databases that are maintained by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and are of relevance to investigators involved in epidemiologic, clinical, and health services research. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We reviewed both national and local VA databases and identified their strengths and limitations. We also referenced specific studies that have assessed the validity and reliability of VA databases. RESULTS: There are numerous national databases housed at the Austin Automation Center in Austin, Texas. These include the Patient Treatment File (hospital abstracts), the Outpatient Care File, the Beneficiary Identification Record Locator System death file for assessing vital status, and the Decision Support System, which provides integrated clinical and financial information for managerial decision making. The major limitation of these databases is that clinical detail below the level of ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes is not uniformly available nationally. These databases offer an excellent opportunity to monitor the health of veterans over time because they track all inpatient and outpatient utilization in the VA. However, at the local or medical center level, the Veterans Health Information and Systems and Technology Architecture contains extensive clinical information, but has fewer patients, varies in format across medical centers, and poses difficulties with data extraction for statistical analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Both local and national VA databases are valuable resources for investigators who have interests in a wide array of research topics, including diabetes. The potential for investigating important scientific questions with VA databases becomes greater as communications and database management technologies improve.

Costs of second allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: A second allogeneic transplantation after a prior allogeneic (allo-allo) or autologous (auto-allo) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is usually performed for graft failure, disease recurrence, secondary malignancy, and, as planned, auto-allo transplantation for some diseases. METHODS: We sought to describe the costs of second allogeneic HCT and evaluate their relationship with patient characteristics and posttransplantation complications. Clinical information and medical costs for the first 100 days after transplantation of 245 patients (allo-allo, 55; auto-allo, 190) who underwent a second HCT between 2004 and 2010 were collected. RESULTS: Median costs of the second allogeneic HCT were U.S. $151,000 (range, U.S. $62,000-405,000) for the allo-allo group and U.S. $109,000 (range, U.S. $26,000-490,000) for the auto-allo group. Median length of hospital stay was 23 days (range, 0-76) for the allo-allo group and 9 days (range, 0-96) for the auto-allo group. Only the year of transplantation and posttransplantation complications were significantly associated with costs in both groups when both pre- and posttransplantation variables were considered. The overall costs of the second HCT were higher than the first in the allo-allo group. For the auto-allo group, there was no difference between the costs whether preformed as a planned tandem or as salvage for relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that second allogeneic HCT is costly, particularly if it follows a prior allogeneic transplantation, and is driven by the costs of complications.

Access to multiple sclerosis specialty care.

BACKGROUND: Health care providers recommend an annual visit to a multiple sclerosis specialty care provider. OBJECTIVE: To examine potential barriers to the implementation of this recommendation in the Veterans Health Administration. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Veterans Health Administration. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were drawn from the Veterans Affairs Multiple Sclerosis National Data Repository and were included if they had an outpatient visit in 2007 and were alive in 2008 (N = 14,723). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Specialty care visit, receipt of medical services. RESULTS: A total of 9643 (65.5%) participants had a specialty care visit in 2007. Veterans who were service connected, had greater medical comorbidity, and who lived in urban settings were more likely to have received a specialty care visit. Veterans who were older and had to travel greater distances to a center were less likely to have a specialty care visit. CONCLUSIONS: Access to care in rural areas and areas at a greater distance from a major medical center represent notable barriers to rehabilitation and other multiple sclerosis-related care.

Cost-effective diagnostic strategies in patients with a high, intermediate, or low clinical probability of pulmonary embolism.

Rapid quantitative D-dimer assays (DD), lower extremity venous duplex ultrasonography (US), and multislice computed tomographic (CT) angiography have been shown to have adequate sensitivities and specificities for diagnostic purpose. The purpose of this study was to evaluate cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies for pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with a high, intermediate, or low clinical probability of PE. A formal cost-effectiveness analysis for the diagnosis of PE was performed. The main outcome measure for effectiveness was 3-month expected survival. The strategy of DD followed by CT was cost-effective and had the lowest cost per life saved for all patients suspected with PE. The conventional strategy including ventilation and perfusion lung scanning followed by pulmonary angiography (PA) or CT was not cost-effective. The leg US after CT was not also cost-effective. In clinical practice, the individual patient's condition should be considered when choosing appropriate diagnostic tests.

Cost-effectiveness of hepatitis A vaccination for individuals with chronic hepatitis C.

The incidence of hepatitis A infection in the United States has decreased dramatically in recent years because of childhood immunization programs. A decision analysis of the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis A vaccination for adults with hepatitis C was conducted. No vaccination strategy is cost-effective for adults with hepatitis C using the recent lower anticipated hepatitis A incidence, private sector costs, and a cost-effectiveness criterion of $100,000/QALY. Vaccination is cost-effective only for individuals who have cleared the hepatitis C virus when Department of Veterans Affairs costs are used. The recommendation to vaccinate adults with hepatitis C against hepatitis A should be reconsidered.

Randomized trial of onsite versus referral primary medical care for veterans in addictions treatment.

BACKGROUND: Patients presenting for treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs) often exhibit medical comorbidities that affect functional health status and healthcare costs. Providing primary care within addictions clinics (onsite care) may improve medical and SUD treatment outcomes in this population. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare outcomes among Veterans' Administration (VA) patients who receive medical care within the SUD clinic and those referred to a general medicine clinic at the same facility. METHODS: Veterans entering SUD treatment with a chronic medical condition and no current primary care were randomized to receive primary medical care: 1) onsite in the VA SUD clinic (n = 358), or 2) in the VA general internal medicine clinic (n = 362). Subjects were assessed at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months postrandomization. Intention-to-treat analyses used random-effects regression. MEASURES: Measures included SF-36 Physical and Mental Component Summaries (PCS, MCS), VA service utilization, SUD treatment retention, Addiction Severity Index (ASI) scores, 30-day abstinence, and total VA healthcare costs. RESULTS: Over the study year, patients assigned to onsite care were more likely to attend primary care (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.20; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.53-3.15) and to remain engaged in SUD treatment at 3 months (adjusted OR = 1.36; 1.00-1.84). Overall, outcomes on the MCS (but not the PCS) and the ASI improved significantly over time but did not differ by treatment condition. Total VA healthcare costs did not differ reliably across conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with referral care, providing primary care within a VA addiction clinic increased primary care access and initial SUD treatment retention but showed no effect on overall health status or costs.

Cost effectiveness of testing strategies for chronic hepatitis C.

OBJECTIVE: This paper compares nine strategies for determining hepatitis C antibody and viral status. They combine two tests for antibodies (enzyme immunoassays (EIA), recombinant immunoblot assays (RIBA)) and one for viremia (reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR)). Using optical density to divide EIA results into three categories (high positive, low positive, negative) was also considered. METHODS: Decision analysis compared strategies on cost as well as sensitivity and specificity with regard to antibody and viral status. Parameters in the decision tree included antibody prevalence, proportion viremic, sensitivity, specificity, and cost of individual tests. RESULTS: The two best strategies are EIA followed by PCR (EIA-->PCR); and EIA with three levels of optical density (EIA-OD), followed by RIBA for EIA-OD low positives, and then PCR for all positives (EIA-OD-->RIBA-->PCR). EIA-->PCR has equal viral sensitivity, slightly lower cost, slightly higher antibody sensitivity, but lower antibody specificity compared to EIA-OD-->RIBA-->PCR. The cost per false antibody positive avoided using EIA-OD-->RIBA-->PCR rather than EIA-->PCR is $36 when prevalence is 5%, and $193 when prevalence is 50%. Using EIA-OD-->RIBA-->PCR rather than EIA-->PCR results in 112 false antibody positives avoided for every true antibody positive missed when prevalence is 5%; this ratio is 18:1 when prevalence is 25%; and 6:1 when prevalence is 50%. CONCLUSIONS: EIA-OD-->RIBA-->PCR is the best choice when prevalence in the tested group is below 20%. As prevalence increases, the choice of EIA-OD-->RIBA-->PCR versus EIA-->PCR will depend on the relative importance of avoiding false antibody positives versus missing true antibody positives. Our analysis makes explicit the magnitude of this trade-off.

Predictors of colorectal cancer screening participation in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to identify predictors of colorectal cancer screening in the United States and subgroups with particularly low rates of screening. METHODS: The responses to a telephone-administered questionnaire of a nationally representative sample of 61,068 persons aged >/=50 yr were analyzed. Current screening was defined as either sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy in the preceding 5 years or fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) in the preceding year, or both. RESULTS: Overall, current colorectal cancer screening was reported by 43.4% (sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy by 22.8%, FOBT by 9.9%, and both by 10.7%). The lowest rates of screening were reported by the following subgroups: those aged 50-54 yr (31.2%), Hispanics (31.2%), Asian/Pacific Islanders (34.8%), those with education less than the ninth grade (34.4%), no health care coverage (20.4%), or coverage by Medicaid (29.2%), those who had no routine doctor's visit in the last year (20.3%), and every-day smokers (32.1%). The most important modifiable predictors of current colorectal cancer screening were health care coverage (OR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.5-1.9) and a routine doctor's visit in the last year (OR = 3.5, 95% CI = 3.2-3.8). FOBT was more common in women than in men (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.6-2.0); sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy was more common in Hispanics (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.1-1.7) and Asian/Pacific Islanders (OR = 2.4, 95% = CI 1.5-3.9) relative to whites, in persons without routine doctor's visits in the preceding year (OR = 3.3, 95% CI = 2.8-4), and in persons with poor self-reported health (OR = 1.3, 95% CI = 1.2-1.5). CONCLUSIONS: Interventions should be developed to improve screening for the subgroups who reported the lowest screening rates. Such interventions may incorporate individual screening strategy preferences.

VA community-based outpatient clinics: cost performance measures.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the direct costs of treating veterans in Community-Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOC) and primary care clinics operated by VA medical centers (VAMCs) between April 1998 and September 1998. RESEARCH DESIGN: In a retrospective observational study of patients in eighteen CBOCs and fourteen VAMCs, direct costs were compared. In addition, the costs of treating patients in new and established CBOCs were also examined. MEASURES: The three types of costs examined include direct cost per primary care visit, direct primary care cost per patient, and total direct cost per patient in ordinary least squares regressions with facility-specific random effects. Indirect costs for overhead and administration were excluded. All cost comparisons controlled for patient characteristics and case-mix differences via the Diagnostic Cost Group methodology. RESULTS: Results indicate that CBOC patients and VAMC patients had similar direct primary care costs on a per visit and per patient basis. Total direct costs for CBOC patients were lower compared with VAMC patients, because of lower specialty and ancillary care costs. Patients in new CBOCs had similar primary, specialty, ancillary and inpatient care costs when compared with patients in established CBOCs. CONCLUSION: Lower total costs for CBOC patients may be a consequence of substituting primary care at CBOCs for expensive specialty and ancillary care at VAMCs. CBOCs may be an alternative approach to providing care to veterans at a lower cost than traditional delivery models based in VA Medical Centers.

VA community-based outpatient clinics: access and utilization performance measures.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare access and utilization performance measures between Community-Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOC) and primary care clinics at parent VA Medical Centers (VAMC) and between VA-staff CBOCs and contract CBOCs. METHODS: The study design was cross-sectional and retrospective. Performance measures were based on data routinely collected for administrative and research purposes by the VA. The sample included all primary care patients (n = 37,084) treated at the 38 CBOCs opened before 4/1/98 (30 VA-staff and 8 contract) and all primary care patients (n = 318,369) treated at the 32 parent VAMCs. Six months of service use data were used to derive the access and utilization performance measures. Multivariate regression analyses were used to control for observable casemix differences. RESULTS: CBOCs are attracting new high priority patients to the VA health care system. CBOC patients had more primary care encounters and fewer specialty encounters than patients in the primary care clinics of the parent VAMCs. VA-staffed CBOC patients had more primary care encounters and fewer specialty encounters than contract CBOC patients. CONCLUSIONS: CBOCs are helping the VA achieve its goals of attracting new patients and shifting the focus of care from the specialty to the primary care setting.

VA community-based outpatient clinics: quality of care performance measures.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) recently initiated a system of Community-Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOCs) to enhance delivery of primary care to veterans. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare quality of care provided to veterans at CBOCs and at traditional hospital-based VA Medical Center (VAMC) clinics. RESEARCH DESIGN: Quality of care was assessed using medical record data abstracted at CBOCs and VAMCs. The analysis used a logistic regression model that allowed for possible within-facility correlation and controlled for patient differences between facilities. SUBJECTS: The study included 4768 patients from 20 geographically diverse CBOCs and 2433 patients from the 20 VAMCs associated with these CBOCs. MEASURES: Quality of care was measured using 7 Prevention Index (PI) indicators and 9 Chronic Disease Care Index (CDCI) indicators, which assess compliance with nationally recognized guidelines for primary prevention, early disease detection, and care of patients with chronic disease. RESULTS: In the overall CBOC versus VAMC comparisons, performance was not significantly different on 15 of the 16 PI and CDCI indicators. In the comparisons between individual CBOCs and VAMCs pairs, 5 out of 20 CBOCs performed significantly below the affiliated VAMC on 4 or more indicators. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that CBOCs overall are providing a similar level of quality of care as VAMCs based on the PI and CDCI, although performance at several individual CBOCs fell below their affiliated VAMC on some indicators. Therefore, it appears that CBOCs are a valid approach for providing quality primary care to veterans.